Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
David Pierce

Jabiru 5100

Recommended Posts

I have not seen any discussion of anyone using a Jabiru 5100. It is 257 lbs, which makes it about 75-100 lbs lighter than a Lycoming 360. It has a complete setup within that weight.

 

http://www.usjabiru.com/aircraft_engines.htm

 

I would be curious to know if anyone is using this option. I am many moons away from this decision, but it is encouraging to see new options.

 

Thanks for your thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a comment in the latest newsletter that several builders were considering/using Jabirus, but no specifics. None flying. I've not heard anyone own up to buying one yet.


Evan Kisbey

Cozy Mk IV plans # 1114

"There may not be any stupid questions, but I've seen LOTS of curious idiots..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have considered the Jabiru 5100. In fact I have placed a deposit on the engine. But after a year of waiting it got too long for me so I let the thing go and got my deposit back. The other factor about the engine is the power rating. Originally it was rated at 200/180 hp (takeoff and continuous) but when it actually came out for production it was rated down to 180/170 hp. That may be sufficient for many Cozies but not enough for my SQ2000. From what I know, the engine is very smooth and efficient. It also comes with a lot of standard accessories and unique two piece baffle - ready for mounting.

 

For further comments on my engine choices, see http://www.abri.com/sq2000

 

(nearly finished)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After my interest in Deltahawks, concerns for the weight (350+ lbs) and the cost ($23K+ for invert version) have changed my thoughts. The 8 cylinder Jabiru 5100 now has replaced it. I heard that there is one Cozy builder that's going for the 5100. Perhaps that was PaulL. Their website claims the 5100 is now in production. Other features includes weight of only 260+ lbs, 180 HP, runs on 100LL and 93 unleaded (from their distributors email), cost only $21,500 and is quiet. Rumors are that the oil companies would love to drop 100LL so that they only have to deal with unleaded. I know builders are concerned with ethanol (and water contamination) that is used in some autogas, but hopefully these will be worked out by the time I need one in two-three years. I can merrily sit back and wait.

 

Greg Lum

Cozy 1161


GregL

Cozy IV Plans #1161

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Just as a sidenote, it appears that also

Bombardier have done work for a new aircraft

engine. It will be however heavier than the Jabiru suggested

above.

 

Anyway this model gives 300 hp:

http://www.vaircraftengine.com/en/technicalData_v-300t.asp

 

I don't remember exactly what was the weight limit of the motor,

perhaps it is too heavy, the turbocharged version weights 210 kg

which is something like 460 lbs...

 

Best Wishes,

Karoliina

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't remember exactly what was the weight limit of the motor, perhaps it is too heavy, the turbocharged version weights 210 kg which is something like 460 lbs...

I just Googled "lycoming 360 engine weight" and low and behold the 2nd link was to Marc Zeitlin's 2004 Oshkosh presentation (the FAQ section). In that FAQ, Marc states:

 

The Lycoming O-360 A-series is the recommended engine. The Cozy is designed to use certified, 4-cylinder Lycoming engines from 160 to 180 horsepower, with dynafocal mounting, weighing 255 to 265 dry (no accessories).

I'm assuming the unit of measure for "255 to 265" is pounds and not kilograms (sorry Marc, couldn't pass up the rare opportunity to throw one back at you), so given that, even the Bombardier V-220 is extremely over weight at 419 pounds dry.

 

Here's what AVweb had to say:

 

What surprised us at a Tuesday-morning news conference is how economical Bombardier claims the engines will be. Stated specs call for a brake specific fuel consumption of .42 pounds per horsepower/hour for the V220 and .41 for the V300T, both at 75-percent power. In an interview after the morning press conference, program director Klemens Dolzer told us initial engineering flight tests in a Murphy Moose experimental and a Piper Arrow are turning in even better economy than originally planned.

I'm not actually that surprised about the economy. You can get all the economy you want provided you can add 160 lbs to the engine.

 

Back to the Jabiru 5100... here's a link the company site with info. on the 5100 installed in a RV-6: http://www.jabiru.net.au/engines/8cylin.html With its 8 cylinders it's a longer engine than a Lycoming, requiring a custom cowl (no biggie), but possibly additional balast in the nose.


Jon Matcho :busy:
Canard Zone Member & Administrator
Now:  Rebuilding Quickie Tri-Q200 N479E
Next:  Building a Cozy Mark IV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had an e-mail from Jabiru a while ago, they claim the 5100 is 150mm longer than the o-360 and would probably fit in a standard cowl. I have my reservations about this, there'd be a fair bit of baffling involved.

 

Their website now shows nifty 'ram-air' ducts that go above the cylinders to replace baffling. Don't know if they would work in reverse for a Cozy. :confused:


Mark Spedding - Spodman
Darraweit Guim - Australia
Cozy IV #1331 -  Chapter 09
www.mykitlog.com/Spodman
www.sites.google.com/site/thespodplane/the-spodplane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time to open this thread again.

It's been 5 years since this engine was mentioned, does anyone have any experience still?

 

I haven't been able to find anything negative about this engine when I was googling, would be interesting to hear if anyone knows more about this one.


Erlend Moen
Norway
Cozy MK IV #1556 - Chapter 20
http://cozy.ljosnes.no

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time to open this thread again.

It's been 5 years since this engine was mentioned, does anyone have any experience still?

Larry Hill has been flying his MKIV with a Jabiru 5100 for a few years now. He's got time on the engine. His comment at the COZY Dinner was (to paraphrase) "If you want to spend an extra year or two on the build installing one of these engines and then have a long period of time where you figure out how to make it work, go right ahead. I probably wouldn't install it again if given the chance."

 

This was in the context of ANY auto conversion - not specific to the 5100, although that's what Larry knows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far, the person Mark mentioned above, and Mike Bowden with his twin engine long ez are the only 2 people I have heard of who were able to make a pusher version of ANY of the Jabiru engines work without overheating (excluding ultralight type aircrafft like titan tornados where the engine sits out in the open, with no cowling, exposed to the air). I know of several builders and more than one LSA manufacturer who gave up on trying to get that engine to keep cool as a pusher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jab 6 - VEZE in Oz - Greg Bakker. Probably a year away from flying. Fun video to watch. This one's going to be a beauty.

 

 

mcjon77, in my experience pusher or puller config is irrelevant in cooling a flat 4, 6 or 8 jabiru as it is for a 4, 6 or 8cyl lycoming. What is the pressure drop required across the cylinders to cool the specific engine? Besides, don't they all use the same basic cylinder on a jabiru? In many respects, it's easier to cool a pusher because you have likely have diffuser length up your sleeve.

 

There are O-235's that overheat on EZ's with 48sq in of inlet area and "tight baffles". My O-360 meets lycoming spec requirements with 20 sq in total, of which 15 sq in is used for 4 cylinders. It's all about the design IMO. Not criticising those that gave up on the installation, just wouldn't ditch an engine based on a lot of unknowns.


Cheers,

 

Wayne Blackler

IO-360 Long EZ

VH-WEZ (N360WZ)

Melbourne, AUSTRALIA

http://v2.ez.org/feature/F0411-1/F0411-1.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just got an email from Larry Hill:

 

I have been flying this combination for a little over 4 years now and it took the first 3 years to work out several problems (mainly oil cooling).

I was confident enough to fly to Oshkosh last year( 8 hours) and after some minor improvements to the oil system over the winter I felt I had resolved all of the problems.

I am very happy with the results. It is a very quiet and smooth running engine and the performance is quite similar to that of a O-360. It performed flawlessly on the trip to Oshkosh this year so it looks like I only have to worry about routine maintenance from now on.

Marc's comments likely stem from my statement at the Cozy dinner that if one wants to fly they should install a Lyc. This just reflects my position that one must plan on doing a lot of extra work for a prototype installation. In fact, although it added considerably to the time tinkering and fine tuning( roughly 3 years), I enjoyed the experience and would recommend the engine to anyone who is willing to take on the extra work.

 

Looks like the engine itself is ok, and hopefully Larry's effort would make it easier for the next guy who are willing to try this engine.


Erlend Moen
Norway
Cozy MK IV #1556 - Chapter 20
http://cozy.ljosnes.no

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

The Canard Zone

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information